Debunked: Sandy Hook: Not Enough Tears

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blood and dead bodies from a crime scene are never shown to the public as far as I'm aware.

Some crime scene photos have made it out to the public, usually leaked and/or just much older cases. Ones I can think of off the top of my head are Saint Valentine's day massacre, Elizabeth Short (Black Dahlia) and the DeFeo murders. I agree though that it wouldn't matter if the photos were out there. Since they think it was a hoax, they would find a reason to say the photos were faked somehow.

Off topic anyway, so will just say that I agree with the thread in that everyone reacts to news of a death differently, and handles their emotions differently. I was close to my dad, but didn't cry all that much after his passing, which surprised me a little bit.
 
Some crime scene photos have made it out to the public, usually leaked and/or just much older cases.
I've heard of cases where pictures of victims are released when there's something unusual about them, like ritualistic killings with messages or symbols on their bodies, in hopes that somebody might recognize them.

Whatever the reasons for releasing or not releasing pictures, any reason to release (or not release) that information is basically null with Sandy Hook. many of the victims here were children, and the rules with children are very different. Children are almost never publicly immediately identified by police, whether they are victims or suspects, and their picture is almost never shown regardless.
 
nono.. sorry Brock, that was my bad.. it wasnt meant as a response to you directly but more of a commentary on how people in the US respond to what they see on TV.. I had no intention of that being directed at YOU specifically.. the word you, thats seen in that post, was meant as a collective, not as singular. I was agreeing with your sentiment.

Oh! I thought the You was meant towards me. I see now how you were using You. I just wasted a perfectly good apology.
 
Some crime scene photos have made it out to the public, usually leaked and/or just much older cases. Ones I can think of off the top of my head are Saint Valentine's day massacre, Elizabeth Short (Black Dahlia) and the DeFeo murders. I agree though that it wouldn't matter if the photos were out there. Since they think it was a hoax, they would find a reason to say the photos were faked somehow.

Off topic anyway, so will just say that I agree with the thread in that everyone reacts to news of a death differently, and handles their emotions differently. I was close to my dad, but didn't cry all that much after his passing, which surprised me a little bit.


Yes some crime scene photos are leaked. The two dead columbine shooters were leaked.

Everyone does act differently to death and handle emotions in different ways. I don't think we can apply this across the board to Sandy Hook families in that they all handled it well, like you said that you didn't cry that much. We weren't in their privacy to see them cry. There were some that were caught on camera that Friday and they were very emotional and crying. Many have spoken about the very bad days and nights that they've had like we would expect them to have. Most of the families that had an interview had a little time pass and were not there to shed tears on camera and managed.
 
About ten years ago, my then girlfriends mother was killed in a very bizarre freak accident. She was being unloaded from an ambulance outside a local hospitals A&E department where she was being taken after collapsing at work with severe stomach pains, when a car reversed across the forecourt at high speed and crushed her between it and the ambulance. (The car driver, who was unused to an automatic gear box had select reverse by mistake, and when the car started to move backwards panicked, kicked out in a reflex reaction aiming for the brake and floored the accelerator.)

Now because this happened mid afternoon at a busy hospital, was seen by a large crowd of bystanders, and was such an odd set of circumstances it received a lot of publicity in the local press and even made the inside pages of some of the nationals. This meant a lot of press, radio and TV asking a lot of questions to the family over several months as the inquest and then an NHS internal inquiry took place.

In those interviews and press conferences, and at the inquest and inquiries the family were stoic, at least in public, they were a mess of tears in private, but in public they had evidence to give and stories to tell, so they focused and on the surface appeared very calm.

The charity Cruse were a great support to us all at the time, and they explained that this was a natural reaction to sudden death in exceptional circumstances. And I think it is sick beyond belief to even claim that this natural reaction to the horrific circumstances that took place at Sandy Hook is in some way fake and is in some way a sign that their bereavement never happened. How does this kind of crap make those who lost loved ones feel? I wonder how the wankers who come up with this bulllshit can sleep at night.

Sorry for the profanities, but this story really does make my blood boil.
 
Last edited:
Oh! I thought the You was meant towards me. I see now how you were using You. I just wasted a perfectly good apology.

Its all good, I went back and reread what I posted and can definitely see how it could be taken as personal.. I should have been more clear in my writing.
 
If anyone here is a lawyer, does the fact that Robbie Parker and Gene Rosen chose to speak publically make them public figures?
 
How does this kind of crap make those who lost loved ones feel? I wonder how the wankers who come up with this bulllshit can sleep at night.

Sorry for the profanities, but this story really does make my blood boil.
100% with you - a big part of the reason I keep coming back here, to make sure this garbage can't spread. It's a hideous thing to judge someone about how genuine their grief is, simply because those who are grieving are trying to hold their dignity intact whilst in the public eye.
 
My father died in September, 1993. I think the first time I actually had a "good cry" was January, 1994. He died four weeks before I got married (he had ALS, and I knew there was a chance he wouldn't live long enough to see me get married), and for me, it was more like, "wedding, wedding, wedding, death, funeral, okay, back to wedding, wedding, wedding" and it probably took that long to catch up with me.

The day after my dad died, my mother and I drove past the cemetery where we eventually buried him. She said, we thought about another one, but we didn't think he'd want to be that close to his workplace . . . and I busted out laughing.

So, I guess my father didn't die, because I wasn't going around crying all the time and I had the nerve to laugh the day after he died. </sarc>
 
If there had been loud sobbing and a lot of tears, the truthers still would have said they were just fakes/hoaxers/crisis actors because they were supposedly being too emotional for it to be real or whatever.
 
If there had been loud sobbing and a lot of tears
what makes you think there weren't? Just because most reporters are decent enough not to film every little thing, doesn't mean those things never happened.

Although I understand the sentiment you are going for.
 
I think 6 pages explaining and providing documentation/ evidence to explain the grief process, re: 'not enough tears', is enough.


This tragedy is 4 years old. I'm locking this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top